Democrats Harvested Ten Times as Much in under-$200 Donations as in 2000; Bush’s Small Donors Quadrupled

But Large Donors Still The Biggest Funders of a Record Haul
Candidates, Parties and 527s are Geared Up for the Fall

The 2004 presidential campaign has become the most expensive such
contest ever. According to the latest Federal Election Commission
reports, total Democratic and Republican receipts amounted to $589
million at the end of June -- a 74% increase over the $339 million
raised at the same time in 2000. Interestingly, the Democratic
presidential field has raised more than Republican President George
Bush: $361 million vs. $228 million (See Table 1).

Smaller Donations Explode

Democratic presumptive nominee John Kerry has raised more than $60
million in under-$200 donations -- virtually the same as the under-$200
amount raised by President Bush. Kerry’s total is nearly six times as
much as the $10.5 million Al Gore and Bill Bradley corralled in small
donations in 2000. Powered and inspired by Howard Dean’s early efforts
to attract small donors and exploit the Internet, Democratic candidates
raised $108 million, ten times more than Democrats did in 2000.

George Bush greatly improved his own performance among small donors
over 2000, when he first ventured outside the public financing system.
His contributions from this group have risen from nearly $13 million to
over $60 million, an increase of 460%. Bush hiked the Republican total
from its previous level of $41 million, a 50% gain in four years (See Table 3).

Larger Donations Are Still Important

Kerry has raised $80 million in $1,000 and up contributions, mostly
in $2000 increments. These $1000+ donations constitute 47% of his
total, compared to 35% from smaller ones. Bush has raised $140 million
in large donations -- about the same amount as all the Democratic
candidates put together. These $1000+ contributions make up 63% of
President Bush’s contributions from individuals. Most of these large
contributions (and about half of Bush’s funds) have come in $2000
increments. Contributions of under $200 make up 27% of Bush’s
individual contributions.

Total large ($1000+) contributions for both parties’ presidential
candidates this election cycle are $279 million -- up from $117 million
in 2000 (See Table 3).

Both Major Party Candidates Are Financially Competitive

As the conventions near, both major candidates indicate they will
accept public financing for the general election, and the fall contest
remains financially competitive. With June receipts of nearly $38
million, Kerry entered the last month of privately financed campaign
activity before the Democratic Convention in Boston with $37 million
cash on hand. Bush, who raised $13 million in June, had $64 million in
the bank; but he has to make it, and any additional receipts, last for
two months until he is nominated by the Republican Convention in New
York City (See Tables 2 & 3).

On the other hand, because the Republicans are holding their
convention later than the Democrats, Kerry will have to stretch his $75
million federal general election grant over three months -- as opposed
to two months for Bush.

Still, Kerry should be able to remain within comfortable financial
range of his opponent. Both parties will be able to spend $16 million
in coordination with their presidential candidates. And both national
party committees seem likely to attempt to spend unlimited amounts
independently in behalf of their candidates -- although i t is possible
that an outside group may challenge such spending based on a past FEC
statement that demonstrating that the national party committee is truly
independent of its presidential candidate may be "unlikely in
practice.”

However the parties use their funds, they will have substantial
amounts of hard money available. Despite the federal ban on party soft
money since 2002, the Republican and Democratic National Committees
have both made up in hard money all of the soft money they had amassed
at this time in the 2000 presidential campaign. And both have far more
cash on hand at this time of year than they did in 2000 ($78 million
vs. $21 million for the RNC; $60 million vs. $9 million for the DNC).

Furthermore, the Democratic nominee could benefit from the vastly
increased activity of new anti-Bush, pro-Kerry independent " 527 "
political groups. These groups are not currently regulated by the FEC
and can therefore accept unlimited soft money. The three leading
organizations -- America Coming Together - Non-Federal Account, Media
Fund and MoveOn.org Voter Fund -- have already spent $69 million during
this election cycle. Comparable pro-Bush and pro-Republican 527 groups
such as Progress for America Voter Fund and Leadership Fund have
started late and spent little thus far. Other tax-exempt social welfare
groups or business leagues that are permitted to conduct some political
activities may also become active in the presidential campaign. The
level of their activity cannot be determined under current federal
disclosure laws.

* * * *

The comprehensive report of CFI’s blue ribbon Task Force on
Presidential Nomination Financing, released in September 2003, can be
found at www.CampaignFinanceInstitute.org.
It details presidential fundraising and spending from 1980-2000 as well
as analyzing the public funding system’s problems and making
recommendations for change.

The Campaign Finance Institute is a non-partisan, non-profit
institute affiliated with the George Washington University that
conducts objective research and education, empanels task forces and
makes recommendations for policy change in the field of campaign
finance. Statements of the Campaign Finance Institute and
its Task Forces do not necessarily reflect the views of CFI’s Trustees
or financial supporters. For further information, visit the CFI web
site at www.CampaignFinanceInstitute.org.